PM denying employment opportunities in varsities to deprived sections: Rahul Gandhi
New Delhi, Feb 3: Congress president Rahul Gandhi on Sunday alleged that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has denied employment opportunities in universities to deprived sections, as his mantra is their exit from the mainstream and development of "industrialist friends".
Gandhi attacked the prime minister citing a media report which claimed that the recent Supreme Court go-ahead for reserving university faculty positions for candidates from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes at the department level may reduce the posts available to them by 25 per cent to even up to 100 per cent.
"First, Modiji snatched educational opportunities from the deprived section of people by reducing seats. Stopped scholarships. Attacked youngsters like Rohit Vemula," Gandhi tweeted.
Now, through the 13-point roster, employment opportunities for them in universities have also been ended, he alleged.
"He (Modi) has one mantra: Exit of the deprived sections from the mainstream.
Development of industrialist friends," Gandhi alleged.
Following an Allahabad High Court order - upheld by the Supreme Court - the University Grants Commission (UGC) had last year announced a new mechanism for implementing faculty reservations, which is calculating total posts department-wise rather than institution-wise.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Supreme Court grants anticipatory bail to Pawan Khera in Assam Police FIR
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Friday granted anticipatory bail to Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with an FIR registered by the Assam Police.
The case arose from a complaint filed by Riniki Bhuyan Sarma, wife of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, over allegations made by Khera that she possessed multiple passports.
A bench comprising Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice AS Chandurkar delivered the judgment after reserving orders on Khera’s petition challenging the dismissal of his anticipatory bail plea by the Gauhati High Court.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court observed that the High Court’s findings were not based on a proper appreciation of the material on record and appeared to be erroneous, particularly in shifting the burden onto the accused.
The bench further held that the High Court erred in making observations regarding an offence under Section 339 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, noting that the FIR did not contain any such allegation. It stated that such conclusions could not have been drawn merely on the basis of submissions made by the Advocate General.
